EU to move ahead with cultural quotas for streaming services • Hacker News Board

Re: EU to move ahead with cultural quotas for streaming services

#341

Post by grimskin » Sun, Sep 09, 2018, 1:01 PM UTC

rbehrends wrote: post #329

grimskin wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, let's say that any title made in EU will suffice for every EU member. Still, for every 100 non-EU (basically, US) titles Netflix would need to get 50 EU titles. And I don't think that amount of movies/series/etc produced in US is only twice as big as in EU.

Netflix already offers only a fraction of its US titles in EU member states. And you'd be surprised. The UK, France, and Germany combined already outproduce America in terms of movies [1] (quality may be a different story, of course). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_industry#Statistics

I am indeed surprised, thanks for the link. So, it's definitely doable. But still, it will require investments just to keep existing entries available.

Re: EU to move ahead with cultural quotas for streaming services

#342

Post by antidesitter » Sun, Sep 09, 2018, 7:30 PM UTC

rapsey wrote: post #337

antidesitter wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Are you saying comparative advantage doesn't exist?

Only maybe in a pre-industrial world where economies are nothing but fishing, farming and mining. Our economies are largely service and manufacturing based. Is one country better at programming, manufacturing, cooking, etc. then another? All of these things are taught and developed. Any country can become good at any of these service or manufacturing jobs. China is a manufacturing powerhouse, but so is the US, German…

Your comment gives me the impression that you don't know what comparative advantage is. Comparative advantage doesn't mean things are "innate and unchangeable". That's nonsense.

Re: EU to move ahead with cultural quotas for streaming services

#343

Post by antidesitter » Sun, Sep 09, 2018, 7:41 PM UTC

rapsey wrote: post #338

antidesitter wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, I see no data that supports rapsey's claims, namely that 1. Protectionism resulted in greater economic growth for the US, Germany, Japan, and China. The example of China is particularly egregious since it was China's economic liberalization reforms in the 1980s and 1990s, including opening up to foreign investment and lifting protectionist policies, that resulted in massive economic growth and massive poverty…

> lifting protectionist policies Not lifting completely, just enough to facilitate economic growth. Importing anything in the US, EU or China is process full of protectionist policies and tariffs that you must overcome. The proof is in the pudding. The right amount of protectionism has proven to work in every successfully developed country. There are NO exceptions. > "Few propositions command as much consensus among…

> Importing anything in the US, EU or China is process full of protectionist policies and tariffs that you must overcome.

What is this supposed to prove?

> The right amount of protectionism has proven to work in every successfully developed country.

Every developed country has different amounts of protectionism. I have no idea what you mean by the "right" amount.

> Economics would not be the first field with a popular theory that is complete nonsense

What popular theory is "complete nonsense"?

> that whenever tried has only resulted in catastrophe

Which catastrophe?

> Funny how all those economists have not convinced a single developed country to believe their theories and put them into practice.

So not convincing someone to implement a good policy means the policy is bad?